About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
MSNBCW 47
CNNW 19
CSPAN 17
FBC 10
CNBC 9
CSPAN2 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
KPIX (CBS) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
LANGUAGE
English 134
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 134 (some duplicates have been removed)
, too. you know what i am thankful for this thanksgiving? i am thankful elections, they have consequences. >> the time for bickering is over. the time for games has passed. now is the time to deliver on health care. >> have you read the bill? hell, no, you haven't. >> the supreme court has upheld president obama's health care law. >> the health care law. >> the signature achievement of barack obama's presidency. >> now they're trying to drag it into the negotiations over the fiscal cliff. >> we have a new message from congressman boehner. >> we can't afford it, we can't afford it and we can't afford to leave it in tact. that's not a new message. >> can you say it was done openly? >> that is not a new message. >> they have been defeated three times. >> we had an election. >> the american people have spoken. >> elections have consequences. >> we're not going to change anybody's mind. >> they need to move on. >> we had an election and they lost. >> i want to thank everyone who participated in this election. >> the presidential pardon. >> the winning turkey can thank his stellar
election that year, his senate seat would have become open. so the governor of massachusetts, the republican, mitt romney, would have been able to appoint somebody to fill john kerry's senate seat. the mts legislature totally dominated by democrats was cognizant that the governor would probably pick a republican to fill the seat if kerry got elected president. so the massachusetts state legislature decide d to change the law. they changed the law so that only a special election could fill a vacant seat. until then, the seat would have to be empty. mitt romney tried to veto that new law. but the legislature overrode his veto, thereby stripping mitt romney of his power to choose a replacement. that became a mute point because john kerry didn't win so he stayed on as senator. but then fast forward fife years. 2009. new president barack obama, the country embroiled in a big debate over national health reform. those against it were against it to the point of rage. and those wo who wanted it were excited to be on the cusp of achieving something they had failed to achieve for decade
been said about this pledge and i will tell you, when i go to the constituents that re-elected me, it is not about that pledge. it really is about trying to solve problems. and so if right now the question is, how do you do that? well, john boehner went to the white house ten days ago and said republicans in the house are willing to put revenues on the table. that was a big move, right? >> a big move? huh? the gop has always been open to raising revenue. governor romney even promised to do that. it seems awfully similar to what speaker boehner offered a year ago during debt talks. >> we have an agreement on a revenue number. there was an agreement on some additional revenues. >> i stuck my neck out a mile and i put revenues on the table. >> revenues on the table? the gop is essentially offering the same thing they did a year ago. plus, they want to keep tack rates for the wealthy the same. they want to cut entitlements, postpone pentagon cuts, and now they are putting health care on the table. mr. cantor says the gop has presented a big move. nah. losing an election is big. i'm st
's lead, the winning argument. president obama won the election. he won the debate on fairness and he's winning this fight in washington and now even some republicans admit it. in the election, 65 million americans voted for fairness. they stood with the president who says everyone should pay their fair share, that there's just something fundamentally wrong with the millionaire paying less in tacks than his or her secretary. president obama drove that point home again today demanding that the rich pay more so the burden doesn't fall on the middle class. >> our first job is to make sure that taxes on middle class families don't go up and since we all theoretically agree on that, we should get that done. i know some of this might sound familiar to you because we talked about this a lot during the campaign. this shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. this was a major debate in the presidential can campaign and congressional campaigns all across the country. >> that's what this election was all about, americans were with him on election day. and they are still with him now. a newark ton post
or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but could the right have gone further had it been armed with a popular vote victory? there does seem to be a difference in the two parties. when al gore lost 12 years ago, he ignored his 600,000 vote victory in the popular vote. he just learned to live with the irony. republicans have carefully forgotten this bit of history, but i have real doubts those on the angry, demanding right would have been so quietly obedient to constitutional law. there's something out there on the right right now that is still uneasy with this defeat. sear
along with a majority in the house and regularly re-electing democratic or republican presidents. i think the best route is for the first one. get this filibuster thing done and get it back to what it was back in the 1930s, when we could all root for jimmy stewart and hope he could be that corrupt political machine we all love to hate in that greatest of all political movies. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. >> thanks, chris. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, the mccain gang wants what it wants. today u.n. ambassador susan rice went to capitol hill to meet with the three republican senators who have been her harshest critics over what she said on sunday talk shows about the attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. it was a meeting ambassador rice requested to try and clear the air. she went to the meetings with the acting cia director. but the republican senators were not swayed, not in the least. in fact, it sounded like they had settled on their talking points. here's what they said aft
6th, the election is over. >> presidential election, your prediction was wrong. >> big time. >> people are open on entitlement reform in a way they haven't been in the past. >> my analysis based on fact, not emotion. >> oh, my -- >> oh, wow. >> things people are saying about the election that are not true, but it makes them feel better to say it anyway. >> we start on a very important day that the world can be thankful for. a cease-fire in the middle east. secretary of state hillary clinton is heading home now after she and her egyptian counterpart announced the deal to end hostilities and greater cooperation between israel and gaza in the near future. >> the united states welcomes the agreement today for a cease-fire in gaza, for it to hold, the rocket attacks must end. a broader calm returned. the people of this region deserve the chance to live free from fear and violence and today's agreement is a step in the right direction that we should build on. >> this news comes after more than a week of violence that claimed 140 palestinian and 5 israeli lives. obviously, this day
the election was all about. john boehner, if he is serious, will have to find out, but he certainly isn't very smart. the congressional budget office estimates, they show that the affordable care act will actually reduce the deficit. it doesn't make a lot of sense to get rid of a deficit reduction program, as part of a deficit reduction deal. the white house already rejected boehner's idea. obama care will not be part of debt negotiations. boehner is up to something here, don't you think? something else, that is. if you watch john boehner closely over the last two weeks, you can see him laying the ground work for the latest ploy. he call eed obama care the law the land, but also tried to link it to obama care and the budget. >> you had said, next year, that you would repeal the health care vote. that's still your mission? >> well, i think the election changes that. it's pretty clear that the president was re-elected. obama care is the law of the land. i think there are parts of the health care law that are going to be very difficult to implement. and very expensive. and at a time where we're t
won re-election fairly handily, but so did republican incumbents in the house. these are some stunning statistics that gerrymandering has created. 93% of the 205 house republicans who ran for re-election won. 88% of them won with 55% of the vote or more. the president received between 51% and 52% of the vote. once the votes are finally all counted. and even though everyone in washington may be saying the right thing, those facts make forging a deal structurally very difficult. on monday senator dick durbin admitted what we've been hearing behind the scenes. very little has been accomplished on negotiations on the staff level. >> now for ten days not much has happened. there's been a big thanksgiving break. a lot of turkey and stuffing. but now let's get back to business. >> although the white house said they remain optimistic, there doesn't appear to be a plan for another leadership meeting until progress is made between the white house team negotiating a deal that's led by secretary geithner but the house republicans, specifically in boehner's shop. in the meantime, to create the appe
for a major national security breakdown three weeks before the election. that is our job. >> senator durbin, you were shaking your head there. >> if this was an nfl game, they would be criticized for piling on. she got the report from the intelligence committee and reported it to the public. just exactly what we expect her to do. they have decided not to include the al qaeda reference so we wouldn't compromise your sources in benghazi and libya and now we have the committees of jurisdiction, the foreign relations committee and homeland security committee all taking an honest, bipartisan look at this. it's the way it should be done. george, i have enough time here in washington to remember when president ronald reagan in lebanon saw our embassy attack and then a barracks bombed where 230 u.s. marines were killed. that sort of thing should at least call the attention of the united states to look to ways to avoid these tragedies in the future. instead this has just been a dance fest to go after ambassador rice. that should come to an end. let's get down to the basic issues as the state departm
the president was on respecting the will of the electorate from the november 6 election, where he believes he offered the nation a choice, and that the popular vote and the electoral vote said, yes, it is time for the wealthy americans to pay their fair share. >> did you get a sense that if he does get what he is asking for in revenue, he would be willing to entertain concessions on entitlements as well? he did do that last year with speaker boehner in the 2011 budget talks. >> the election has changed the conversation. to refer back to last summer is to talk about yesterday's news. the national debate around the presidential election and we believed completely changed the terrain for this national conversation to happen in congress. >> from news reports about that meeting and general discussion right now, it seems like maybe this conversation about entitlements, medicare, social security was not really part of the conversation at the white house. is that true, and are you concerned? >> we join together in making the case in a paid ad and then doing briefs for action. as a group, we said the
in this election. what made them think so? the polls were tight but favoring president obama. what north star was guiding the gop convincing them that the white house would be back in their hands in january? back where their hankerings were convinced it belonged? there was a darker side to this deep sense of executive entitlement, the sense they had the same assumed access to the white house as they did in the corporate dining room. it's more than a bit frighting. i have heard at least one person of the right state their pained belief or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but cou
the election two weeks ago, he was all sunshine and smiles. >> i'm the most reasonable, responsible person here in washington. the president knows this. he knows that he and i can work together. the election is over, now it's time to get to work. it's pretty clear that the president was re-elected. obama care is the law of the land. >> i'm reasonable. i'm responsible. obama care's the law of the land. now, there's a guy the president can work with, right? wrong. politico says that boehner's opening offer to the president is to keep the bush tax cuts, cut entitlements, and postpone cuts to the pentagon. in other words, they haven't budged at all. how is that compromise? how is that reasonable? but it gets worse. speaker boehner now says the health care law should go under the knife. boehner says, quote, we can't afford it. we can't afford to leave it in tact. that's why i've been clear that the law has to stay on the table as both parties discuss ways to solve our nation's massive debt challenge. folks, this debate is over. the american people have spoken. mitt romney ran on two big ideas in thi
said about this pledge and i will tell you when i go to the constituents that have elected and re-elected me, it is not about that pledge. it really is about trying to solve problems. >> the majority of those who distanced themselves from norquist so far have been senate gop members, not house gop members. do you think that speaker boehner and congressman cantor, do you think they can make any leeway with the caucus on a tax increase? >> well, only time will tell. this is the big question. you're asking the big question because the speaker has set the right tone. now it is time for the right substance. now it is time for the speaker to put his plan on the table. after all, the president hasn't been secret about his plan. the president's plan is there for everybody to see, every american can go to the president's budget plan to see his combination of tax increases on the wealthy in addition to cuts, but speaker boehner has again set the right tone but so far hasn't come up with any substance. >> which entitlements if any are democrats prepared to put on the reform table? >> well, democrats
of these games of chicken and scenarios is that we had an election and it was pretty clear. the democrats won. obama is back in. and one of the clearest issues in that election was that taxes should be raised and raised on the rich. that gives the president even more leverage. i think the president has enormous leverage. if we do go over the cliff in terms of tacks? we go back to the clinton tax rates, which as i remember it, were not so onerous. they certainly were pretty good in terms of the economy. the economy did not suffer. the economy did much better under clinton than bush. i don't think at least on the tax side, going over the cliff is that big of a deal. it's not really a cliff at all as you suggested and if we get major cuts in the military and defense spending, i'm not sure that's a bad idea at all. >> now, joy reid, we all deal with being dumped in different ways. that is the choice grover has made tonight on cnn. let's watch. >> i don't see any movement toward ts republicans wanting to raise taxes or people wanting to break their pledge. in fact, to be fair to everybody, some of
campaigner. we congratulate him on his re-election. what we don't know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on big issues like we currently face. >> reporter: what you're seeing here is a slightly different strategy than we've seen in the past. that's the president focusing more on stakeholders, making his case to the public. bringing business leaders here to the white house, going on the road. and spending less time with lawmakers at least up to this point. >> sounds like a pressure tactic rather than perhaps a negotiation tactic. we'll keep on it, and let us know who else goes through those doors. dan lothian, thank you very much. you know, as we watch this story playing out, each side wants the other to give in. or at least give a little more in the fiscal tug-of-war. in a little less than a couple of minutes now, we'll see what the republicans want from the democrats. and what they might offer to get what they want. n't just listen . listen to these happy progressive customers. i plugged in snapshot, and 30 days later, i wa
the election about the fiscal cliff. what is at stake here for both sides? what happens if they don't get a deal? >> well, look. i think what happens to both sides, it's not even what happens to both sides, what happens to us which is the collective, right? it's what happens to the country which is 4% of gdp disappears overnight. and that's what this is all about. by the way, it's not just about what happens january 1st or 11:59 the day before january 1st. it's already starting to impact the economy. whether it impacts consumers -- and we'll find out today, by the way, in terms of thanksgiving and what's that meant, whether consumers are coming out or not -- but thoorz the bigger issue that manufacturing has already started to slow down. people are starting to worry. it may end up in the economic numbers already, just the fact that we're having this debate. and then come january 1st, do we go over? what does that mean? is it the fiscal cliff? or does it look like the fiscal bungee cord? that's what some people are calling it. we go over for two weeks and then we snap back and get a deal a
raise tax rates. which is why he's pushing against that idea. two senate republicans up for re-election in 2014 have bucked norquist saying they are willing to let taxes ride. chambliss spoke to his hometown station. >> that pledge i signed 20 years ago was valid then. it's valid now, but times have changed significantly. and i care more about this country than i do about a 20-year-old pledge. >> on sunday south carolina senator lindsey graham also broke ranks saying the norquist pledge can no longer be a conservative litmus test. >> when you're $16 trillion in it debt, the only pledge we should be making to each other is to avoid becoming greece. but i will violate the pledge, long story short, for the good of the country only if it democrats will do entitlement reform. >> but a bipartisan consensus to raise taxes grows, republicans insist they won't budge on kaepg the bush tax rates for the wealthiest at 33% and 35%. they've expressed more openness to raising revenue by eliminating individual loopholes and deductions in the tax code and believe they have public opinion on their side.
with the president since the election, actually since the debates. does this do either of them any good? rick santorum is out front. and julian assange is out front to answer critics and our questions tonight. let's go "out front." >>> good evening, everyone. i'm erin burnett, outfront tonight, an early christmas miracle. or at least the glimmer of one today. barack obama bringing glad ti tidings of great joy to avoid the fiscal cliff. >> i will go anywhere and do anything it takes to get this done. it's too important for washington to screw this up. >> and john boehner, not to be outdone, put a little early present under the tree too. >> i'm optimistic that we can continue to work together to avert this crisis and sooner rather than later. >> these are pretty glum faces to deliver those presents. no smile from either one of them. but investors didn't care, they're excited about the present, the dow gained more than a full percent throughout the day. will we have a true christmas miracle? courtesy of those two. oh, let's hope that they don't wear those hats. i spoke this evening with republic
, these are noises that you made to sound conciliatory after an election, and we think back to 2009. the republicans sounded very conciliatory in the days after president obama's reelection when he was holding a high approval rating, but by april or may of his first year that that had melted away. so right now is happy talk from the republicans. we will see whether that materializes into votes. lou: such happy talk, why aren't there more smiling faces in the republican party? >> pretty unhappy talk from what i can tell, and to this point pretty frivolous. you see members of the united states senate demand is not even their negotiations, but taking a timeout to beat up on grover norquist to is some on elected activists type who was not a player in this and does not have a seat at the negotiating table, was not elected. what does he have to do with any of this? is seems to me this is the opportunity for the republicans in the house, but also to some extent in the senate to explain what they want to know what kind of entitlement cuts that will demand. instead they're beating a boy norquist. lou: we als
had. it is where they were before the election. they gotta wake up and see the election, change things and they actually have to meet democrats somewhere in the middle. >> bill: i would hope. i would hope. new york times this morning, front page of the business section in terms of closing loopholes, romney was never specific about which one. new york times is saying that they know -- now we know one of the ones they're targeting. the headline is a tax break once sacred is now seen as vulnerable. what they're talking about is the mortgage interest deduction. there was no doubt it is on the table. it is one they're targeting rather than raise tax rates on the wealthy, they're going to either limit or get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. which is the most popular one. >> the most popular one. politically difficult i think. that's really the problem with romney's entire approach that said we'll just create revenue by closing loopholes. you go down the list of the largest loopholes and pretty quickly, you get to
the new government is formed as the new elections are on january 23rd. >>> and on to egypt, things are calm right now after four straight nights of violent protests. tahrir square, a large crowd still camped out there. and just in the past hour mohamed morsi met with top judges. morsi issued a decree seizing new powers. it sparked massive riots that killed one protesters. nbc's jim maceda joins us live. we were advised to be careful when saying morsi tried to seize power. specifically run down the decree or what he's seeking here. >> reporter: well, the whole issue of power is what's at stake, and you mentioned that meeting in your lead. that meeting with -- between morsi and top egyptian judges is absolutely critical to this whole playing out of what's going to happen to egyptians in this country. that face-to-face meeting has been going on now for almost four hours. there were indications going into it that a compromise was close, and now this gets into legalistic leads but this is important. it's about a constitutional crisis. it does appear that morsi agrees to a sweep of the d
, and it has become susan rice for quite some time during the election period as well as this time frame, and that seems to be a where a lot of public focus is, even though they raise criticisms about the intelligence community nor broadly. >> absolutely. kelly, thank you so much. joining me now is former state department middle east officer joel ruben, and molly ball and michael skirmonsih and jimmy williams. you heard kelly o'donnell report that the face of all of this is susan rice, but we know that the intelligence, the talking points, if you will, did not originate from her or the u.n. is it appropriate she's the face of all of this in your opinion? >> thank you, tamron, for having me on. it's unfortunate that dr. rice has become the face of this, because, in fact, she is a highly regarded accomplished civil servant leading our mission in the united nations. she was put in the spotlight in order to communicate what the intelligence community and administration believed to be the best way to communicate the attack on benghazi. rightly now congress is looking at the question of what w
will prevail as we move through the process. we need to be working together. the election was november 6. we won't have another one for two years and it's time to start pulling everybody together as the american people expect us to do know matter how they voted last november to begin to solve this big problem. >> as the leader mentioned, the issues with regard to the fiscal cliff is pretty straightforward and the president in his press conference shortly after the election stated its his goal and priority, jobs and the economy. ought to be about jobs and the economy. republicans couldn't agree with him more which is why the proposal the president has put forward to solve the fiscal cliff raises taxes on a million small businesses who employ 25% of the work force and an accounting firm has done a study has said if the president's proposal went into effect which is to raise taxes on the small businesses out there that it would cost us over 700,000 jobs and reduce take-home pay by 2% and reduce economic growth by 1.3%. what the president is proposing to do would hurt jobs and the economy, which
. president obama's re-election means the taxes for upper income earners are going up one way or another. speaker john boehner deserves some leeway to try to mitigate the damage by negotiating a larger tax reform. leeway to negotiate sounds pretty sane to me. for some, of course, that's a great big lump of coal wrapped up as an early christmas present. >> revenue that happens to be the democratic code word for tax increases. that is simply not an acceptable position for any true conservative. republicans were not elected to rubber stamp obama's agenda. >> seems some news personalities may be taking a tax increase on the highest earners somewhat personally. anyway, republicans didn't win the white house or the senate. i wonder what other conservatives have to say about that. >> the republicans are in a shocking amount of disarray right now. the republican party has not developed an alternative idea set other than what mitt romney and paul ryan were campaigning on and sort of by default it has become their opening negotiation position. >> i see. so their opening position is the one that wa
a democratically elected autocrat take the place of an undemocratically elected dictator. on the other hand, there are some real pluses possible here. if egypt takes some real responsibility for making the cease-fire work, we'll stop those missiles from going through the tunnels in gaza, and they seem to be moving in that direction. that can make a real difference in terms of what's going on in gaza and their attacks on israel, which have been the cause of the whole thing. >> what would you like to see the president say, to put a brake on morsi seizing power? what words does the president have to use to say we're not going back to mubarak? >> he has to express those concerns and say, obviously, we want this change to not just be democratic but also supportive of stability and also protecting minorities and human rights in egypt. he says that, but at the same time he has to point out that behind all of this is iran. iran's support of hamas, hezbollah, syria, and the way that has been filtered into weaponry that goes through egypt, into gaza, if that can be stopped, by egypt, and if iran can
the president is fond of susan rice. you saw that in the press conference after the election. he really forcefully defended her. you saw more passionate people had been waiting for from the president. if there's a time to push someone, the president believes is the best personed to the job, it's after you win the election in a pretty strong way. so the president, i think, if he wants to push her, now is the team to do it. it's interesting that so many senators such as john mccain and lindsey graham oppose her. policy-wise she's closer to them in terms of policy and intervention and human rights than, say, senator john kerry, for example. >> amanamanda, you referenced t press conference where the president went to bat for susan rice. let's actually take a listen to them. >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who this nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmurch her reputation is outrageous. when they gt after the u.n. ambassador apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a prob
'hanlon and jonathan landay. >>> elections have consequences, i say it all the time. and the democrats are feeling emboldened. they want to see taxes go up on the rich. they want to protect programs like medicare and medicaid. will they give president obama room to negotiate some kind of deal that gets through this hell coming january 1st. they say they won, the other side lost, they're going to fight. >>> plus democrats are moving to end the so-called silent filibuster which republicans have used to quietly say if you don't have 60 votes, you ain't going nowhere. this is the big question, if they're successful, it's possible, it's possible the democrats will be able to get some things done. we'll talk about that in a minute. they're going to be just like jimmy stewart finally. they're going to force them to actually filibuster like they did in "mr. smith goes to washington." anytime they really want to shut down the senate. >>> and the democrats considered least likely to win back her senate seat beats the odds, and i think thanks to todd akin, and is back for a second term. our friend, the great
stayed with them as a colleague during the civil war and after grant was elected president initially appointed washburn secretary of state and washburn became very ill, after ten days he submitted his resignation to president grant show grant regretfully had his resignation and he regained his health which was always very fragile and grant the then offered him the position as minister of france, ambassador of france. >> michael hill on washburn, minister to france in the 1870 franco prussian war, and the only power of the state providing political and humanitarian support. q&a sunday night at 8:00 on c-span. >> now a discussion on entrepreneurship, immigration reform and innovation. economist douglas holtz-eakin and aol co-founder steve case, at the aspen institute for 30 minutes. >> next we have a panel on america and where it is going, steve clemens -- steve clemons is the empress area of washington ideas. >> hey, folks. everybody is running to the thompson reuters counter. thank you for joining us. great to be with you. i am steve -- steve clemons, editor of large of the atlantic,
. >> the election's over. he won. congratulations. >> if we can get a few house republicans to agree as well -- >> we all agree but we're not going to raise taxes on people that make less than $250,000. we should take them out of this discussion. >> i've got a pen. i'm ready to sign it. >> he's got the republicans on the ropes and they know it. >> obama's answer to this budget crisis is to raise taxes on the wealthy just because he ran on that promise. and won the election. >> the president really wants to reach an agreement, he needs to be talking with the members of his own party right here in washington. >> it's too important for washington to screw this up. we really need to get this right. ♪ how do you like me now ♪ ♪ how do you like me now ♪ >> good afternoon, it is difficult to hold down the excitement here in new york. it is a growing frenzy that everyone's talking about. there are fantasies of celebration, if the numbers go their way. there are teams pooling resources. there's talk of high stakes and long odds. no, it's not the powerball lottery. it's the fiscal cliff. just
through the election. and they're handing out flyers all over the heartland of the country, obama is not going to take your guns, they're trying to fog the election and get through the election, but if they do, it's katie bar the door. stuart: yes indeedy, look at black friday. next hour we'll talk to the gun store owner who took out the ad in the paper. if you voted for barack obama, your business is not welcome. it's been great for his business. he's on the show the top of the hour coming up. perhaps all research in motion needed was "varney & company" to put it on death watch. since we did so, the stock is up 5 #% in one month. 70% up in three months, a lot of positive buzz surrounding the blackberry 10 due the end of january and the stock has gone straight up despite our death watch. maybe we should put microsoft, a stock that i own, on death watch. take a look at the video please, two armed robbers made off with nearly $100,000 in black friday cash. the two men hid in a target store in new jersey, after it closed, they entered the cash room, that's where cops say the men tied
elected. the only thing i am honoring is the oath that i take when i serve when i am sworn in in january. >> chambliss already made a similar statement last week. the question is is this a real softening of positions? does it give them room to make deal. >> two things. first, let's look at the real room being created. so far i haven't heard anyone say i am willing to raise marginal tax rates as part of a deal. they're arguing with the head of the antitax coalition about whether closing loopholes is breaking the pledge. it is pretty narrow. it does show they're frustrated because they were sent to washington to negotiate, make deals, make things happen and they find themselves ham strung by this guy that voters haven't really heard of and saying who elected him? >> a lot just know they don't want to go off the fiscal cliff. here is the question. if republicans are building to eliminate deductions for wealthy, make the wealthy pay more, is it too far for democrats to push to get rates increased? what's the difference? >> i think the real problem here with democrats as far as democrats are
the iranians, remember they have a presidential election coming up, and if there's a deal cut and it's associated to someone who might be running for president, you better believe it. the opponents will try to attack it and try to undermine them. we've seen that will before. this is an executive issue. it's also an united nations issue and a p-5 plus one. i think the president of the united states comes in and says, look, we have the leaders of france and britain and china and russia and the u.n. and we're trying to prevent nuclear weapons, you know, you should probably not meddle in this. that's a winnable argument. i think particularly coming out of this -- obama out of a strong election. no one like gaddafi. no one liked libya. no one liked the soviets. it's doable. >> to partially answer the same question. the issue for many in congress is whether this negotiation quote-unquote allows iran to continue enriching at the 3.5% level or not. the historical position of the united states going back to the early 2000's has been that there should be a suspension of all enrichment as a con
're really going to draw the line and say, we're not going to reopen that debate. we won the election, so sorry, john. that said, there are specific programs in there that might be part of the spending negotiations that take place. >> you know, kristen, politically speaking, doesn't this add another wrinkle to an already difficult negotiation process ahead? >> i think it absolutely does. i think to some extent speaker boehner might be sending a message to republicans in his conference, making the point that, look, just because the president won the election we're not going to roll over on all of the issues that we care about. it's hard to see he has a whole lot of leverage on this issue. you heard speaker boehner tone down his rhetoric after the supreme court ruled it was in fact constitutional. and now president obama has won reelection. the president, the white house, democrats on the hill are saying this issue is a nonstarter. it's hard to see where he finds leverage on this issue. unless he tries to go for some of the smaller issues like medicaid spending. but i think this is going to
to hear because it seems that before the election there was actually some uniform opinion this absolutely was going to get done by the end of the year. what changed? >> well, it's so easy to say in general we're going to work this out, talk, and have the nice photo-ops, but when it comes down to dollars and cents it's the same old argument that democrats want to see some kind of an extension of tax cults for those making less than $250,000 a year but not for the wealthy. and the republicans still want to see some proposed cut, some kind of numbers on how they're going to reduce entitlements, especially medicare spending. so we're not close to actually having those kind of talks yet. what we have right now is a pr phase, a public relations phase, where both sides are trying to work the business community or work main street behind their side of the argument. >> and it does seem that we have a split not just about what needs to get done or how we get to this deal, dana, but about the urgency of what would happen if we didn't come to a deal. the white house put out that 14-page report on mon
. he will also talk about the 2012 election and recent meetings at the white house between congressional leaders and president obama. this is an hour and 20 minutes. >> we are delighted to have grover norquist with us. of course, he is president of americans for tax reform but in the spirit of full disclosure, he is also a member of our board of directors and a very important colleague. grover spoke here several months ago, i should say here at the center, but not in this room because we moved -- there may be some glitches, so i apologize in advance. i am sure we will do better next time. however, grover talked about taxes, u.s. economic policy. but that was about taxes and the electoral campaign. now we had elections and the taxes are at the center of a very important political debate and at the center of negotiations between the obama administration and congress, particularly the republican controlled house. as i watched the president during his recent press conference and listened to leaders of the house, i think everybody agrees it would be highly desirable to reach a c
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 134 (some duplicates have been removed)